@LiquidFeet
I reacted to you in the order of which you had written everything down. It was a reaction to this:
"What one does with the inside ski, foot, and leg, how fast one does it, and when in the turn one does it, determines how much edge angle the outside ski develops."
This is not true. Like I said, I can ski with a massive a-frame and hardly tip the inside leg and still get good outside ski edge angle. Look at Vlhova, Gut, Vonn, Odermatt.
This is Odermatt, massive a-frame, outside knee is pretty inside. Inside knee is very high and inside ski is not tipped that much.
So yes, 1 is untrue. 2 is very hard to answer, not sure. I'll come back to it later. But my opinion is yes. It's definitely true to a certain degree.
3. Also hard question, but yes edge angle is the biggest influence on pressure and turning radius. How you get that edge angle is irrelevant. Edge angle is edge angle, be it with inside or outside ski tipping. Your ski really does not care whether you tipped it with the inside or outside ski to 45 degrees. It only cares about the 45 degrees.
4. Hard question as well, but I'd say yes. So yes, ski outside ski bend determines radius. But I have a different view of what needs to be done with the inside ski than you have. I believe (and this is opinion, I have no research for this to back it up) that you want to disengage the inside ski as much as possible, to let the outside ski do its work better. So if I find a 45 degrees angle on the outside ski and a floating inside ski with no weight more desirable than a 45 degrees angle on the outside ski with some weight on the outside ski. Because it could be possible that the inside resists the outside ski from turning more. So weight on the inside ski and engaging that ski limits the potential of the outside ski imho.
5. I've done it and I don't feel a different result. I feel a different result when I push the inside leg forward though or when I completely disengage the inside ski. Hence I try the exact opposite of what you are trying when skiing. I am not trying to engage the inside ski, nor trying to get it dig into the snow. I am trying the exact opposite. I'm trying to get that inside ski off the ground and the least engaged to the snow as possible. Sometimes my inside ski is not even carving. Also in wc skiing they don't ski with 2 clean lines all the time, but with one.
For point 2, 4 and 5 look at this clip. Look at what the inside ski does from the fall line/gate onwards. It disengages a lot of the time. It starts skidding and ends up in a reversed pizza slice. Also ends up being far forward compared to the outside a lot. But look how little snow there is coming of the inside. The ski is being disengaged to optimize outside ski performance. That is how I view the subject matter.
Another common misconception is that you need the inside leg to bend in order to get angles. Well:
Pretty straight inside leg. Not a lot of vertical seperation. But angles are easier with more vertical seperation and it makes the chance of booting out so much smaller.
I really look at skiing from a physics point of view and not a biomechanics point of view. There is in no way, shape or form a relationship between biomechanics and performance if the physics is the same. What I mean by that is what I said before. A 45 degrees angle is a 45 degrees angle, 60 km/h is 60 km/h, 800 kilograms of water per cubic meter is 800 kilograms of water etc... you get the point. Those numbers matter. I could also get hip to the ground angles by not even tipping my feet, but by dumping my hip into the turn. Performance wise it will get me the same result, but it will make it more difficult to change direction quickly if I use those 'big movements'. But the ski only cares where it is at (angle, speed, CoM wise etc..), not how it got there.